I could feel the heat coming off it when I stood next to the repaved section. They didn't repave the parking area at the edge. Opened to traffic again, seems firm enough to drive on at 160⁰F.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

A quick lesson on logical reasoning:

If you want to show that a piece of technology A is inefficient and you know that another piece of tech B is more efficient, then you can use the inefficiency of B as evidence for the inefficiencies of A. Basically, for some inefficiency threshold T where any value above T is poor efficiency, then A>B and B>T means that A>T.

Here, we're comparing vapour-compression (A) and solid state (B) heat pumps. Solid states are much more inefficient. So you have AT. You can't use this to make any claims about the relationship between A and T.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    We're talking about an edge case here, there should never be a vehicle driving over roads that fucking hot. The road crew should have never opened the road for driving until it cooled down closer to 120⁰F or so, 160⁰F is still too fucking hot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Which is a fair claim to make. I don't know why you went with "EV batteries aren’t safe over 40⁰C", which is clearly False based on the source you cited, then went on a whole roundabout talking about how it's not safe at 45C, then 70C, then how active cooling is inefficient while citing the efficiency of Peltier devices. Your top-level comment was fine. Nothing else you said after that made any sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments